Hi, guys!
This is my first post, Andrew invited me in to the list. I read the Levi
et al paper, and I noticed that they measured an input power of around
400 watts and an output power of around 2000 watts. But (for control
simplicity reasons) they had no insulation on their tube furnace, and
had to keep input power connected so as to keep the reaction going.
Why not use an ordinary, properly insulated electric tube furnace fitted
with cooling coils on the inside? That way, the input power could be
disconnected entirely once the reactor starts to run, and the
temperature controlled by the coolant flow. A run of 96 hours producing
2000 watts with no input power would be a lot more convincing to many
people. The reason is that, even if the power measurement is inaccurate,
the fact that the machine is self sustaining means that some power must
be being produced. Probably compressed air in stainless steel coils
would be a suitable coolant for this application.
I think that a self sustaining reactor running for a few days at a few
kW would go a long way towards improving the credibility of this
particular device. There is no need to generate electricity, just
thermal output without electrical input, only using electrical energy to
start the reactor.
Duncan Cumming
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem : power conditioner needed
Resent-Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 13:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 13:33:57 -0700
From: Andrew <andrew...@att.net>
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
I doubt that Rossi would allow a power conditioner, because he himself
states that there is some
<snip>
Andrew
